[73833] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Internet speed report...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael.Dillon@radianz.com)
Mon Sep 6 05:19:30 2004
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040904090745.04aa8ec8@localhost>
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Michael.Dillon@radianz.com
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 10:18:09 +0100
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> most recently, Guido Appenzeller, Isaac Keslassy and Nick McKeown have
> written a paper that they presented at SIGCOMM 2004 about "sizing router
> buffers" that is very informative and goes against the grain of the
amount
> of buffering required in routers/switches.
In the paper
http://klamath.stanford.edu/~keslassy/download/tr04_hpng_060800_sizing.pdf
they state as follows:
-----------------
While we have evidence that buffers
can be made smaller, we haven't tested the hypothesis
in a real operational network. It is a little difficult
to persuade the operator of a functioning, profitable network
to take the risk and remove 99% of their buffers. But that
has to be the next step, and we see the results presented in
this paper as a first step towards persuading an operator to
try it.
----------------
So, has anyone actually tried their buffer sizing rules?
Or do your current buffer sizing rules actually match,
more or less, the sizes that they recommend?
--Michael Dillon
